Videos
(157)Screenshots
(325)Cheats and Walkthroughs
(207)
Oh goodie. California Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) want the Supreme Court to consider reversing two lower federal court rulings in California that found the state’s law restricting minors from accessing violent video games was unconstitutional. (Strangely enough, Sess just addressed this topic yesterday in this week’s Sessler’s Soapbox.)
As GamePolitics reports, Sen. Yee, in partnership with the California Psychiatric Association and the California Psychological Association, has submitted a brief of amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) to the Supreme Court over the aforementioned unconstitutional video game law. In the brief, Yee asserts:
Violence, Department of Psychology at Iowa State University) to support its argument for the need for the lower courts’ rulings to be overturned. According to Anderson, via his website:
“There are reasons to believe that violent video games may have a larger harmful effect than violent TV and film effects...There is a significant relation between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior. Exposing children and adolescents (or ‘youth’) to violent visual media increases the likelihood that they will engage in physical aggression against another person. By ‘physical aggression’ we mean behavior that is intended to harm another person physically, such as hitting with a fist or some object.”
As always, though, the same three things are as clear as ever:
1. Violent video games do not make kids more violent.
2. M-Rated games are intended for mature audiences, and as such;
3. Parents, not the government, are ultimately responsible for deciding what kinds of entertainment and media their kids consume.
The petition is expected to make its way in from of the Supreme Court in the fall (Good thing there aren’t a million more important things that need to be taken care of in this country.)
Like I even need to pose a question about this one.
Source
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 1–20 of 43
1232
scorpian876
Oh the NERVE OF them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Total B.S. People become violent when being pressured or being bullied , the Columbine shooting was caused by the two suspects being bullied!!!!
I do believe that parents should really pay attention to what kind of violent things under age teenagers
are playing and what they watch on T.v. It should start in the home with the kids and parents.
Video games are in out let to release stress.
Back in history I never heard of Billy the kid picking up a X-box 360 or a PS three and playing Grand Theft Auto and go out and start to shoot people and steal cars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He was inspired by real violent situations, not virtual!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GamebustaZX
this crap really bugs me they are trying to restricet games for everyone because of bad parents buying kid rated M games the goverment should leave that up to the parents if they want to buy M rated games for there 12 year old kids my mom kept my gaming rate to my age and she used the parental control on my xbox even thought I found out what the password was my mom would not let me play rate M Games until I turned 17 which I am now I think this games banning stuff is BS I swear if the goverment starts stoping games for coming out I will be really pissed because all there going to do is mainly go straght after GTA and rockstar
blakout2500
This sort of thing really amazes me. I happen to know for a fact that violent video games DO NOT make children act in a violent way. I have been playing violent video games for the last eight or so years, and since then, my violent behavior has pretty much ceased to exist. It was actually part of a counseling program for me to play a violent video game whenever I became angry. The only things violent video games do is reduce stress and violent tendencies. If a child were to play a violent video game at the age of twelve, they would understand that it is not real. If a child were to play a violent video game at the age of six, they may not understand, but it is the parents job, not the governments, to restrict what games children can play. In all history, with periods that had video games, what serial killers actually played video games? I can think of none. If you were to ask my old psychiatrist what would have happened if I didn't play video games, he would tell you that I would probably be in prison for murder by now. Video games CAN do harm, but to the majority of children it will do nothing. It will only increase bad behavior if already present, in a psychopathic state, meaning one who has no regard for right and wrong. It is impossible, without other outside stimulation, for a child with understanding to act out based on a video game. Without a source, such as parents, for other violence a child, by nature, will not think it is alright to act out what they see. The moment a parents reinforces an act, whether intentional or not, the child believes it to be true. If anyone disagrees, I will try my hardest to get in contact with you so you can talk to my old psychiatrist, so he can explain the GOOD violent videos can do.
LuckyGamer777
Wow. Just wow. I have trouble believing that people who are part of America's Brain basically, can see videogames as a threat of causing violence. Or that ANY media causes violence.
Media can nudge a already existing serious problem, like a kid planning his parents death due to a divorce or something, but attacking games is sheer stupidity.
Games are perfectly fine where they stand today. No violent game is worse than a violent movie, there is a perfectly good rating system, and a game is just that, a GAME.
I don't see any politician making much ground in this war (I'm being generous with the term war) considering its just another form of media like movies or music, and should and will most likely be treated as such.
Another thing? Why do they treat parents as though they are helpless to stop this from happening to their child when in fact the parent is the best defense and where 99% responsibility lies? The law shouldn't dictate what content is appropriate, parents and consumers should. Going any farther is violating the 1st amendment.
Honestly, I think its just a few snobs with too much time on their hands playing the blame game.
If any war can be waged against games, its that they are borderline addicting and should have time monitors, AND THEY DO!!! (Luckily, I don't use them considering tht even though I'm on PS3 and do not yet own the DLC for Fallout 3 have already logged 93 hours on my main character.)
sundog660
What they don't mention is that in past psychological studies, children who have more fantasies (day dreaming about pushing a bully down the stairs) are actually more non-violent than those who don't. I know that when I go home and turn on the XBox and beat up a few pixelated hookers with a virtual baseball bat, I feel better and I'm much less likely to punch my boss in the face when I go back to work. That's just how it goes.
scoobythebeast
Exactly, whenever i buy an M rated game. I always bring by dad or mom to the register hand them the game and they read the ESRB rating and why its rated that way. When i first started playing video games they actually did their research. They looked into the ESRB, what each of their ratings mean and the reasons a game might be rated one way or another. This is what parents have to do with their kids that play video games. They have to try and understand what their kids are doing. My parents check every game i buy and i have games like GTAIV, The Godfather II, and call of duty 4. And theres nothing wrong with me, im an honor role student, play sports and dont have any criminal record at the police station or discipline record at school. This all falls on how parents raised the kids BEFORE video games.
Grave_Chapel
Violence is part of human nature and history. People who point to movies, comics, D&D, and now video games as a reason of violence really have no scientific argument, if a person does comment an act of violence due to these "outside influences" they where most likely going to comment an act of violence anyways. It just happened to be that item that pushed them, they can find influences in bible, war stories, political news and more. On the other hand it has been scientifically proven that juveniles that do not have the support system of a family are more prone to acts of violence and delinquent activities. Besides, no one complained when we were setting turtles on fire and were regularly using mushrooms.
theotheryellowmeat
I personally don't see the problem in actually enforcing the esrb that already exist. I own all the grand theft auto games, but i wouldn't want my 8 year old nephew to have them. Some games are meant for adult audiences, and thats fine. This could actually help make mature rated games better. Game deveopers could push the envelope of mature titles with out the fear of backlash from people crying "these games are in the hands of our children". For the developement companies worried about loss of sales, you shouldn't be marketing these games to children, that's f'd up. The movie industry went through this with Scarface in the 80's and it hasn't killed violent movies (have you heard of the Saw franchise). If this law gets overturned or not it ultimately comes down to the parents. If you wouldn't take your kid to see the Texas Chainsaw Massacre why would you buy them the Texas Chainsaw Massacre Game.
DarkKatarnII
man, not one of these politicians ever mention the parents as being the ones at fault. i mean come on, its not the games companies job to raise your kid... its the parents. if you dont want him to see violent stuff... dont friggin buy him GTA or Halo or Gears of War. i swaer i have ran into these type of fools that dont let their kids watch anything violent on tv... but they just got them GoW or a game like it. one of these days they will push us too far and we gonna riot with our Plasma Rifles and Chainsaw Guns and pokeballs... ok maybe not riot like that but you know what i mean.
adub424
Just remember guys as we the gaming generation grow older we have the ability to let our lawmakers know how we feel about this subject. This could be a very serious issue for the future of our favorite hobby. If your State Rep goes off on one of these witch hunts, and you are a registered voter, be sure to let them know how you feel. We have the right to vote for them or someone else. Increase your participation in your government and don't let those who fear the art choose for us.
spartenkiller456
you know its funny how these dips work they say how bad and horrible it is and how its going kill people but do to human nature that my friend is a selling point on the game we all like hyperviolence in a game just look at the sales for gears 2 and in the words of jack Thompson "[The] Sims 2... contains... full frontal nudity," "wait a minute jack are you telling me that I can create anybody and see there hot body" i say "what am I waiting for I need to buy this game". another funny thing is that people were protesting the release of gta iv to the point were they put up fences and guards this particular protest didn't become a riot thank god but who do you really think is listening to besides other idiots certainly not the gamer and definitly not R* the people in the reception have the day off so the bottom floor is empty(think about it who are they going to recieve the place is blockaded) and the people who actually can change things in the company are 30-90 stories higher then you doing there job you didn't change anything and you never will unless somebody wants to wipe there ass with the constitution and throw away the first amendment and the solution is not to censor video games doing so would be no different then going to a art museum with a spray can and painting over everything there kid shouldn't see even though you have the power to ensure your kids don't see all you have to do is not take them to the art museum and if you do dont pay for there ticket there is no solution because there is no problem in the words of Adam Sessler "either kids haven t been playing as many of these brain melting/ultra-violent video games as some politicians believe they have, or kids who have grown up in the age of violent video games (and as a result been exposed to them more than previous generations) have somehow managed to successfully develop the necessary mental capacity to distinguish between fantasy violence and real violence, and process that distinction accordingly." also 300 is far more violent then gears 2 or grand theft auto
TheRighteousFascist
If a gamer allows themselves to act violently upon a video game, they were insane in the first place. Video games are taking the blame because it's easy to blame something that portrays violence and that many people want to see removed from society anyway.
Godsbigmike
It's completely crazy to me that some people think that certain forms of entertainment will brainwash you into committing acts of violence. I wonder, if that psych analyst played 3 years of violent interactive video games, would they become an instrument of madness?
I suppose there is the rare, impressionable person who won't be able to differentiate reality from the game world. But really, people like that need supervision and medication. It's them, not the games.
Is it bad that I take the side of a violent game over that of my fellow human beings? Hhmmm. Perhaps the games have affected me?
MrRockstar2U
You know, they need to watch the Penn and Teller's episode they did on violent games. They let a 9 year old, who plays these videogames which are supposedly turning him into a deadly aggressive killer, and they let him fire an AR15...he missed the first shot, and didn't want to take another shot.
Then the kid broke down and started crying his eyes out. Now, how dumb do you have to be? The media and some of our fine government officials(why?) attack video games as a way to get recognized. There is NOT direct causal link to violence and violent video games. Now, there has been with music, I will say that. Mosh pits anyone?
Why don't they address the insane gas prices and all the soldiers who need to come back home, and how to help other countries who are too poor to even afford video games instead of wasting their time on this.
Darkborn
See back in my days like when I was around 4 through the age of 10, I played games like Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake, Unreal. I'm now turning 20 in 2 days. I have never, ever, had the intent of killing someone or had the reason to hurt someone because "I saw it in a video game". I saw games back then as "Fun" and "Entertainment", and I still do today. I remember the first time playing Doom I was 5, and I still play it today. I can see the difference between a "Game" and "Reality". Maybe the kids today with all of their newfangled syndromes and stuff can't see that, and probably need to be restricted from playing them and not everyone else who is smart enough to see the difference.
Okay, I realized that sounded harsh, but it's my opinion.
bleeka101
To start i myself was raised on video games violent and not and it was never up to me if i bought the video game or not it was always my parents not some senator or other official and were do they get this reaserch to prove that violent video games makes a child more aggresive beacaus growing up i saw children who never have played a video game that were more prown to fighting than any child that had played games and really does the us goverment not have more important crap to worry about than wether games make children aggresive or not in my oppinion i think that the sale of video games could help to get us out of the ressesion were in just think about it.
STorpedo
Well, I don't know about children becoming more dangerous, or what have you, if they play games, but it is a much more potent media than, say, film, or music. An average album doesn't last very long, and a film's 2 hours long, but a game can last for a while longer, and be interactive to boot.
I'm sure all of you, as have I, been literally, 'glued' to the monitor, taking into account absolutely nothing that happens around you, letting the hours pass by. I'm not going anywhere with this, but all I'm saying is that this issue isn't as black and white as some people might see it. Perhaps the issue isn't with children becoming more violent, or with serious long-term effects, but with games becoming a sort of 'drug' (yeah, I know I sound like one of those crazed mothers, bite me) that children might be a tad bit more sussceptible at their young age; there's nothing wrong with 'drugs' so to speak, reading a book a day, or obsessing over musical instruments, and so on, is more or less productive, gets you through the rough day, and might give you a purpose in life, etc. etc. But while, productivity-wise, games are no worse than movies, they form a heck of a potent mixture, for one reason or another, when you add interactivity, and a hell of a lot of thrills (such as the ones found in violent games), into the mix.
I'm just going off on a limb here, but with these easily-accessible 'thrills' everywhere, and a sense of accomplishment you feel (when you associate/become one with the character you're playing) when accomplishing tasks with him/her, video games form a powerful medium, and with daily life being what it is, the latter pales in comparison with the former. Ergo, you become addicted. Which isn't that good, unless they start handing out jobs in the games industry to average gamers like cupcakes. So, in retrospect, I think the argument against videogames is certainly misplaced; I don't think blood and gore and so on can harm a child's psyche all that much, not really. Unless he/she's 7 or something, in which case you do get long-term effects by just crossing the street to get ice-cream, just because of the nature of the age. Like I said, I'm not really going anywhere with this, but I felt that it needed to be said.
P.S. What is black-and-white, on the other hand, is how f-in pathetic the whole argument is for "parents to be ultimately responsible for the material that gets in their children's hands"; that is a load of b!@#$*t and everybody knows, at least in the back of their heads, it's people justifying their views on videogames with some holier-than-thou standards that parents are responsible for their children, "in general". Obviously specific cases aren't taken into account. Parents are responsible, they pay the taxes to get their voices heard in the council. If they don't like what the guy's doing in the office they don't vote for him. If he's still there, they move state, if that's where they draw the line, or campaign, or what have you.
UnknownKillerSim
This just in! Suicide bomber's computer found with Minesweeper- angry parents decide to waste taxpayer's money for a court hearing their going to lose against Microsoft!
Damn this country's getting crazier and crazier by the second...
Tygraph
This pisses me off, I'm not going to lie but when it comes down to a solution to vioent videogames, parents need to do their jobs. I, like many other gamers, started off young playing violent videogames and such. I remember when I first played GTA at a young age. I realized that anything I wanted to do was in that game and I had no urge to do these actions outside of the game. Anyone who does this has horrible parenting and a warped sense of, well, common-sense. Quit scapegoating!
Thanks,
-Tyler
dractar
i can't believe this is how bad the world is today. even though there are a lot worse things in the world than video games, people like ESRB have to ruin all the fun.
Displaying 1–20 of 43
1232